A Simple Theory for God

Is there a God? If so, what is She like?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: A Simple Theory for God

Post by Dontaskme »

Greta wrote:Thanks for trying, DAM, but I don't share your faith.
I'm going to try one last time with you Greta. But I will also respect any rejection you have, because I understand that the ego is a tricky character...it's like the wayward child before the Father.

The understanding of what's being talked about here is not a faith, the immediacy of presence does not require any belief or proof. IT IS right here NOW...without error or doubt.
Greta wrote:Maybe it is all one consciousness having a game of life as you and the mystics suggest, but I don't think it's that simple. Some years ago I chatted with a God believer online who was saying that the perfect and immortal soul goes through the adventure of life, but with death all the soil and dirt of life is washed off and the perfect soul is revealed again.
It is all one consciousness, you are conscious, your dog is conscious, dam is conscious. Any thing that is alive is conscious. ALIVENESS is CONSCIOUSNESS.. therefore consciousness is all things...while the 'things' in and of themselves are not the consciousness just as the word 'water' is not the water, the things of the world are not the consciousness but are concepts arising in consciousness aka knowing.

So how is consciousness known to itself?

Consciousness is not a thing..consciousness is born on contact with the thing it knows. The thing and the no thing are one in the same moment. For example: there is no sensation of touch without some thing to touch. But the sensation of feeling is only there aka born when the two surfaces make contact. So this is overwhelming proof that oneness is the only presence, there are not two consciousnesses...only ONE
When awareness knows sensation aka makes contact..consciousness is born, contact is made with itself... only the mind/consciousness is born not YOU the AWARENESS....Consciousness is an aspect of Awareness inseparably one and the other....one unconscious, the other is the same one waking itself from unconscious to conscious one...aka conscious of itself via the contact.

Greta wrote:It seemed to me a rather cruel and pointless system. If a soul is perfect before life and comes away unchanged afterwards, why go through all the agonies of life?
But this is the great misunderstanding - there is no before or after life. No thing is living life, it lives itself, there can't be life without it's counterpart death, there is no death without life. Can you imagine being alive for ever and ever and never having any rest from it, now that would be torture, but life is not set up like that, it gives itself periods of sleep, (death) in order for regeneration to spring forth, (awakening from sleep).... it's so beautiful, so intelligent and perfect...because from this understanding it is realised that nothing is living or dying, and that is the eternal return.

When there is Identification with this AS happening to a ''me'' ...that thought is the only cruel aspect of this, that's the misery self. Life has given it self unconditionally without wanting anything back in return. It's a miracle to be alive in the first place, it's a beautiful gift.

But then if one simply doesn't like the gift it can always be returned to sender...it can kill itself...albeit in the illusory sense of the word. I think it was Jesus that said...no one said it was going to be easy, just that it would be worth it.


If YOU are here now then you must have always been here. Not as a separate character, but as the AWARENESS of that character. The characters come and go, but the AWARENESS does not, it is always here. Other wise it wouldn't be here now. Nothing ever happens to NOW, you are THAT.

That's all folks... tune in next time for more thrilling or not so thrilling adventures. https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/73 ... 4ea3f2.jpg

The image is saying..''where ego I go''..inseparably one and the same shining presence here NOW.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: A Simple Theory for God

Post by Dontaskme »

Greta wrote:
It seemed to me a rather cruel and pointless system. If a soul is perfect before life and comes away unchanged afterwards, why go through all the agonies of life?
You see Greta, the agonies of life you mention here is not suffered by the Awareness You are Greta...that is the suffering of the dream character believed to be the born one. What you are has never been born or died. If you can see and rest in that one there is your salvation from suffering.

See that suffering and agonies are thoughts and sensations that arise and fall away. See that behind any suffering and agonies is always a self shining presence that never ever leaves you...a presence so pristine, untouched by any pain or pleasure. This is LOVE..it never leaves you because it never came to you. It is you.

We grapple with the rope thinking it is a snake, which is a slippery little blighter, but once we loosen our grip on the snake and let it slip, we realise it was never a snake, it was only and ever a piece of rope.

If your looking for a point in life then you automatically will create disappointment. Life has no point to being, and therefore cannot be disappointed. Life can never be happy because it's never been unhappy.
Last edited by Dontaskme on Mon Jan 16, 2017 9:42 am, edited 6 times in total.
Reflex
Posts: 951
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 9:09 pm

Re: A Simple Theory for God

Post by Reflex »

Greta wrote: I hate to break this to you but you are 13.8 billion years too late. The universe has not been a "oneness" for that long. It's is now a massive multiplicity.
Not quite up to date on the scientific point of view, are you? That all changed about a hundred years ago.

I was asked, “Are all beliefs equal?” After thinking about it for a while, I had an epiphany. I answered, “Personally, no; practically, yes because there are no true beliefs.” Beliefs are artificial boundaries we create for ourselves to establish an identity.

Behind the barricades of pre-established structures, the foxes of the intellect may engage in clever reasoning, but the lion Being continues to roar outside the gate. — Tarthang Tulku, Love of Knowledge

A human being is a verb, a self-conscious act of relating. We are the relating of a relation — a synthesis of the Infinite and the finite, Eternal and temporal, Freedom and necessity — relating to itself. Thoughts and beliefs are necessary for ordering our existence, but identifying with them cuts us off from Wholeness. We are only as isolated as mind makes us to be. Hence, mind is at once our greatest asset and most oppressive tyrant.
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: A Simple Theory for God

Post by Greta »

Reflex wrote:
Greta wrote: I hate to break this to you but you are 13.8 billion years too late. The universe has not been a "oneness" for that long. It's is now a massive multiplicity.
Not quite up to date on the scientific point of view, are you? That all changed about a hundred years ago.
Missus Science doesn't know science after all, narny narny nah. Are these games necessary? Thanks for your contribution.
Dontaskme wrote:I'm going to try one last time with you Greta. But I will also respect any rejection you have, because I understand that the ego is a tricky character...it's like the wayward child before the Father.
Sorry DAM, don't keep trying to explain. I'm no mystic, just a realist. I like terra firma. The way I see things is that, if you cut your foot off with the lawnmower, you'd be scared and in great pain, and you won't figure, "oh well, that accident happened to the version of me that no longer exists in this now" - because the temporal "now you" shares the same fate as the now non-existent past you. So the practicalities of life render the philosophy moot to a fair extent.

Trouble is, even if we are all just ripples in the fabric of the universe, a lot of those ripples are in competition, many of which will benefit from taking something from you, be it material or personal. We instinctively acknowledge and respect the struggles and separation, even if the practical world is ontologically questionable. Yes, we are all ultimately aggregated stardust of a continuous big bang, or, as I like to think of it, part of the animated ooze bubbling on the Earth's surface. However, we have to deal with the rest of the ooze, which requires a certain amount of focus on the separation of reality as well as the oneness. Besides, the diversity of reality is fascinating. The idea of overall homogeneity does not appeal to me at all.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: A Simple Theory for God

Post by Dontaskme »

Greta wrote:
Sorry DAM, I'm out. If you cut your foot off with the lawnmower, you would be scared and in great pain. You are not going to be sanguine, knowing that it's all just a dream, a silly illusion that only worries the unenlightened, and doesn't matter.
Well that didn't take you long to give up did it, especially after saying you were going to chase me relentlessly with no respite. But the truth is, you back off because I am your mirror and you don't like what you see in it....you see there is nothing there to bounce off, so you lose interest, this is what the mind does, the mind is only interested in itself, aka the ego...it never seems to question where that ego is coming from? it never questions the exact source or location of all the knowledge it apparently thinks it and only it has accumulated and calls it it's own... saying I know this, or I did that.

You go on to say, that it is disrespectful when all that hard earned learned knowledge is acknowledged as illusory. But fail to give the same respect you wanted for that recognition to the one who have learned to think backwards who are equal in their effort when their much hard earned learnt work is put into the understanding that knowledge is in fact illusory not real.. How typical.

There is no thing here to be unenlightened or enlightened. Enlightenment simply means this silent IS-ness prior to any thought present.

The illusion is that the pain is happening to a someone living inside the body. There is no one living inside the body, there's just the body, the mechanical instrument aka the sensor of the sensation. The body is not feeling the pain. There's just PAIN...does the severed foot lying on the grass now separated from the rest of the body squeal in agony at being cut off, no, the severed foot feels no pain. PAIN is felt by awareness NOT the body, the body is just an experience, a sensation arising in impersonal awareness, not the body. No thing owns a sensation.Can the sensation of pain be separate from that which is aware of the pain? no, however, the pain will come and it will go, leaving awareness totally unscathed.

YOU as awareness are NOT the body. The body comes and goes in YOU. If there was a YOU inside your body, if you were real, you would be able to stop yourself from being born, and stop yourself from dying, or stop yourself from thinking, and breathing, you would be able to choose every thought, you would be able to stop yourself from experiencing pain and pleasure, you would be able to stop yourself from living. Just see if you can stop all those things happening?? ..you can't can you?
That's because there is no you because there is no OTHER than you.

Who is choosing to identify with pain as being theirs?



Greta wrote: I appreciate all the oneness stuff, I really do, but for the most part I don't care about it.
You simply don't care about it because you have delved into the concept of SELF AKA ONENESS and failed to fully understand it. And then you go on to say '' The world is full of competing entities'' ...which isn't what's happening here. You say competing entities as if there are two of you doing battle against each other. Who is the other you that you seem to be in conflict with here?
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: A Simple Theory for God

Post by Greta »

Um, I edited that earlier post because I didn't like its attitude. You must have started writing before I finished editing. Feel free-to edit yours if you wish. I always edit a lot so it's probably best to wait before replying.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: A Simple Theory for God

Post by Dontaskme »

Greta wrote: Yes, we are all ultimately aggregated stardust of a continuous big bang, or, as I like to think of it, part of the animated ooze bubbling on the Earth's surface.

However, we have to deal with the rest of the ooze, which requires a certain amount of focus on the separation of reality as well as the oneness.
Yes of course, no one is going to doubt that in conjunction with the nothingness, there is here the everything, the everything has to be lived as well. Except, no one is living the everything. Everything is this living one. :roll:

The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.

Your the one that separates everything into two things, of which you tend to favor one over the other. Not I... I am totally above all that mind game stuff. Doesn't mean I don't play the game, I do, it's unavoidable and beyond my capacity to choose.
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: A Simple Theory for God

Post by Greta »

Dontaskme wrote:Your the one that separates everything into two things, of which you tend to favor one over the other. Not I... I am totally above all that mind game stuff. Doesn't mean I don't play the game, I do, it's unavoidable and beyond my capacity to choose.
If we are all one and not playing some semantic game here, could you please give me your money, your home and possessions? After all, if I am enjoying your stuff and we are the same - just part of this one thing - then I am sure you will be just as happy. PM me and we can arrange for transfer of goods.

My position is simple - of course everything is obviously one thing, but it makes sense to take the separation aspect of reality seriously rather than brush it away as an illusion. Of course, despite your words, you obviously do take separation seriously, which is why I don't expect a PM with details of how to transfer your money and possessions to me.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: A Simple Theory for God

Post by Dontaskme »

Greta wrote:
Dontaskme wrote:Your the one that separates everything into two things, of which you tend to favor one over the other. Not I... I am totally above all that mind game stuff. Doesn't mean I don't play the game, I do, it's unavoidable and beyond my capacity to choose.
If we are all one and not playing some semantic game here, could you please give me your money, your home and possessions? After all, if I am enjoying your stuff and we are the same - just part of this one thing - then I am sure you will be just as happy. PM me and we can arrange for transfer of goods.
Greta wrote:My position is simple - of course everything is obviously one thing, but it makes sense to take the separation aspect of reality seriously rather than brush it away as an illusion. Of course, despite your words, you obviously do take separation seriously, which is why I don't expect a PM with details of how to transfer your money and possessions to me.
I think I've already said umpteen times before that although separation is an illusion we still have to take our illusory part seriously, however, for the second umpteenth time, no one aka oneness is taking their part seriously. It only appears as if they are.Actors on the stage in a play or tv drama, do they not have to take their part very seriously in order to impress their audience.? of course they do, even though they know they are only acting.

You keep bringing up the idea that it doesn't make sense to focus on the oneness only, and I've already agreed with you, but still you keep banging on about that point. I don't think you have listened very well to my posts. But why should you, you have already said you don't care so so be it.
The play of life known as Lila, aka Lila, ( Sanskrit: “play,” “sport,” “spontaneity,” or “drama”) in Hinduism, a term that has several different meanings, most focusing in one way or another on the effortless or playful relation between the Absolute, or brahman, and the contingent world.

For that to work as the many of the one, each illusory player has to act as though it's separate from the whole. Otherwise nothing would work and nothing would be known, the play of opposites have to be for anything to be. The illusion of separateness is an illusion full stop. This is not rocket science to understand, but obviously there is still a lot of people that don't know that yet. If you already know what I'm talking about then stop acting like you don't, just say you know it, and leave the subject there.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: A Simple Theory for God

Post by Dontaskme »

As for why relationships in life are illusory.

In life there are no relationships, they're purely mental constructs, necessary, albeit illusory. The nature of the union between Nothing and ALL possibility is without beginning or an end.

Beginnings and Endings aka Birth and Death are concepts in an illusory moment Of the mind.


The existence of opposites provides a meaning to a word. The word by itself is devoid of any meaning without the presence of it's opposite, for example; good is known because of it's opposite bad, otherwise what good is could never be known. The opposite is a word as well, which gets it's meaning from the word it gives meaning to, which is nevertheless without a meaning by itself. Therefore, since opposites are in everyday life, it only means that the quantum nature of meanings is a word with it's opposite in the same moment. This implies that the meaning which you do not want is also present in the meaning that you do want, for example right or wrong. If man understood this mysterious phenomenon of the opposites in the mind, every relationship would be harmonious.



Image
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: A Simple Theory for God

Post by Dontaskme »

Image


ACTS of CONSCIOUSNESS.


TIME stops everything happening all at once.
osgart
Posts: 517
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2016 7:38 am

Re: A Simple Theory for God

Post by osgart »

perhaps the answer to god is at the quantum level of reality. Its the source code language for the intelligence we find in nature. A non local perhaps non physical language it seems to be.
So maybe God is forming the universe like a telephone switchboard operator. And the switchboard is quantum mechanics.
Reflex
Posts: 951
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 9:09 pm

Re: A Simple Theory for God

Post by Reflex »

DAM:

With respect to your philosophy, been there, done that.

I want to point out that what does not relate does not exist by definition. Your idea of the Absolute (Oneness) is therefore meaningless: it does not provide a way for ordering our lives any more than if your premise were ignored completely. Illusion or not, if I hit my thumb with a hammer, it hurts all the same. Even where the idea of Maya was invented, people don`t jump in front of busses to test their hypothesis.

Unity (Oneness, the Ground of being, God, the Absolute, Ultimate Reality or whatever title suits your fancy) and diversity stand on equal footing or not at all -- at least, not in any way we can make sense of. In other words, calling separation an "illusion" is meaningless and misleading.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: A Simple Theory for God

Post by Dontaskme »

Reflex wrote:DAM:

With respect to your philosophy, been there, done that.

I want to point out that what does not relate does not exist by definition. Your idea of the Absolute (Oneness) is therefore meaningless: it does not provide a way for ordering our lives any more than if your premise were ignored completely. Illusion or not, if I hit my thumb with a hammer, it hurts all the same. Even where the idea of Maya was invented, people don`t jump in front of busses to test their hypothesis.

Unity (Oneness, the Ground of being, God, the Absolute, Ultimate Reality or whatever title suits your fancy) and diversity stand on equal footing or not at all -- at least, not in any way we can make sense of. In other words, calling separation an "illusion" is meaningless and misleading.
It really surprises me when people who say things like ''been there done that'' regarding the oneness concept ..then say stupid things like refrain from jumping in front of a bus...as if you are trying to prove the concept of oneness false. THIS IS NOT A TEST, it's an understanding, any fool can know something, but not necessarily understand that something.


I already know and understand what you are saying, it's like of course fire is hot and it will burn, and one is not going to put their hand in the fire, that's a natural process programmed into the illusion itself, the point is, no person ever removed their hand from the fire, the hand was removed long before the assumed person was conscious of the removed hand.. meaning, no person ever did anything, because there is no person full stop. If there was a person inside your body doing the actions then they would have control over their bodily functions and movements...for example just try stopping yourself from removing a hand from fire, or having a thought, or stopping the awareness of a thought...impossible isn't it?? that's because there is no one separate self doing anything, every function / action is a unitary action, it is known in the reaction, not in the action which is only ever one with itself...so in this sense there are only reactions, aka Illusions appearing to itself...this is not rocket science.

ILLUSION is not a dirty word you know :shock: ...it's a pointer pointing to what is not...it's pointing you home to realness.

I don't agree separation being an illusion is misleading, meaningless yes, because life is generally completely meaningless, there is no inherent meaning to existence, except what the imagined character puts there, which is a complete fabrication of the true reality...but for communication purposes only, the idea that separation is an illusion.... is not misleading, certainly not to someone with an ounce of intelligent awareness anyway. The idea that separation is an illusion is a very positive thing to understand in order to provide clear order and clarity to the life of a character capable of transcending the idea of separateness, a separateness that was artificially put there in the first place that apparently stuck. So what's fun about that? being stuck in a groove, far better to unhinge oneself from the groove.

So I don't actually know why you are being so blasé about what the nondual speakers put out there for others.It's no different than what the philosophers are doing, they're all just putting their shit out there in the hope that someone will take the bait and believe in it in order to make them feel like they've said something of importance...aka (give meaning to existence) ...So yes, projections are put out there for all to mull over and to pick and choose from that only what they want to hear in order to create the illusion of continuity to their existence, a reinforcement of the illusion so to speak.

Don't you think that if people became more aware of the truth that there is no person inside their body..that they'd become more relaxed about life?

Don't you think that knowing there is no individual doer ..a better more empathetic nature toward others would ensue within the human condition?

It's basically a free lunch...and who can resist a free lunch? ..enjoy the illusion, it'll be over all too soon.
Last edited by Dontaskme on Wed Jan 25, 2017 9:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reflex
Posts: 951
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 9:09 pm

Re: A Simple Theory for God

Post by Reflex »

Calling the diversity of things an "illusion" is meaningless and misleading. Unity and diversity are not mutually exclusive.

Pantheism is a dead end.
Post Reply